User blog:Rena Charming/Bold Suggestion - Character Backstory vs Centric Character
Bear with me. Please. Okay? Bear with me. Don't write this off from the get-go just because it goes against the status quo. It might mean a very significant change for the wiki if it's approved, but this wiki has survived its fair share of significant changes, especially related to the episodes' centric characters. I think another change would do us good, we have long and hard debated over which characters are centric in this or that episode, and four years into this complicated show we have yet to figure it out. Every one of us disagrees about certain centrics, and that's probably never gonna change, and we acknowledge that it's not our fault, it's the show's fault. Once doesn't ever make our lives easy for us - from sketchy centric characters to dual roles, from repeat actors to 2-hour episodes, from a spin-off to episodes named after characters, from characters embodying other characters to people continuously coming back from the dead... it's a fucking mess, all the time. Running a wiki for this show has put us through hell and back. But this big intro isn't really getting me anywhere, so I'll just get to the point: I think we should consider ditching the "centric character" motif and do what the other wiki does, establishing "character backstory" sections instead. Now, how would this work? Instead of making it so that an episode is considered to be centric to certain characters, we would only take the backstory featured in the episode into account, which would solve a lot of problems we have. Take the last two episodes of season 1, for example. In 1.21, the flashback story's primary focus is given to Snow White, but Mary Margaret herself is featured in only one scene of the present, with Regina stealing the focus in the Storybrooke events. In 1.22, we are told the story of how Prince Charming reunited with Snow White, but Emma takes the cake in the present - as she often does in Snowing episodes. Therefore, we reach certain compromises with episodes such as this: Regina is given 1.21 as a centric, even though it's an unearned honor as far as the flashbacks are concerned, and we have Emma and Charming centric to 1.22... which is a bit of a headscratcher, seeing as how Emma doesn't feature in the flashbacks at all, and we created the "mirroring" option simply because we felt there should always be centric characters for episodes with flashbacks, something we have now discarded. I think that a "character backstory" section on the episode infoboxes and everywhere else on wikia would be more logical and fair, and it wouldn't stray much from what we already have. Take 3.11: all 5 characters that we have as centric would still be listed in the same - alernatively titled - section, but we wouldn't have to deal with an episode being centric to 5 characters (just odd), and Regina's exclusion (due to her flashback having been deleted) wouldn't seem unfair. According to Joe, every act in that episode is centric to the character whose flashback is featured. Well, act V is certainly centric to Regina, but she doesn't get one, and isn't listed with the others. Unfair. If we make it about "character backstory", then that's just fine. Then there's season 4: think of how many episodes heavily feature Anna in the flashbacks, and yet she's never really given a chance to be a centric character because she's not featured in the present - 4.09 being centric to her is a big, big stretch, and a major deviation from the system we've worked with all these years. So if we're being open to changes such as that, please keep an open mind to this. The criteria wouldn't vary much, and I think it would only work to the benefit of a lot of characters, as opposed to the way we do things now. Granny and Geppetto, notable supporting characters who will probably never carry episodes of their own, could be given 1.15 and 1.20 again, for example, and Red and Pinocchio, the characters we do have as centric, would get to keep those episodes. No more "shared centric episodes", which I find to be reductive - it's as though those episodes mean less to the characters. It would perhaps be hard to figure out which prominent characters in the flashbacks go into such a section. For example, Hansel and Gretel win in the story for 1.09, of course, which makes sense too because they're iconic fairytale characters. But then we have Rapunzel in 3.14. Charming leads that story, but that character is very important and iconic to her own right. But of course, she is never featured in the present day, so we can ask ourselves: do we really need to take a backstory into consideration if there isn't actually something for the character that we need to look back on? No present = no past, know what I mean? But then we have Bo Peep and King Poseidon... both featured in flashbacks and the present, rather prominently, both iconic. But also episodic. Maybe we can rule out episodic characters. But that brings us back to Hansel and Gretel. It's a conundrum. I guess we have to compare both systems and work out their kinks and see which is more beneficial. This is, of course, a flawed system as well, and it has a lot of kinks that need to be worked around. What would we do for the categories, for example? Right now, we have Snow-centric, Regina-centric, etc. - even categories for the likes of Cinderella and Gretel, which I always found to be unnecessary. I don't know what could be done about that. The same goes for what we would call the episode listings on character infoboxes. "Notable backstory episodes"? Cos that's unsightly. I don't have the answers for everything, if we decided to adopt this system it would come with a lot of debating and a lot of thinking, so that's a con right there. But who doesn't like a good challenge? :) My biggest request is that you don't brush this off simply because you can't be bothered with it, I would appreciate feedback, even the kind that's dissuading, so long as it's reasonable. Maybe some sort of compromise can be reached that follows a logical trail. It's just that what we have right now... It just doesn't work for a lot of episodes, we can agree with that. So, let's keep an open mind and an open discussion. Here's an example of what could be done with the latest season (notice how very little changes, especially in the second half): I've managed to deliver several arguments on the pro side, several on the con side, and I myself don't know what is best. I just find that the current system frustrates me so, and wish there was something more satisfying. :( You know? And I guess I just needed to write all of this down. I'm less certain of the idea now that I've considered all of the disadvantages it would bring. Had I only talked about it tangentially, I'd be more inclined to ship it on shallow grounds. Please give your input. As far as the characters themselves are concerned, none of them would be harmed, but a vast array of them would be benefitted. But the wiki work... sigh. Fire away in the comments. And for God's sake, be nice... it will not kill you to be nice, I assure you. Category:Blog posts